Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

[Harambe]

Lowering the bar because it's not okay to be accused?

I believe you have me blocked, and that's ok. But you have asked a question that starts leading back the inquiry we should be considering here; Is this man capable of setting aside his personal feelings in favor of the constitution/law?

Let's frame what a Republican asked the very first day of hearings

...the question before us is whether or not he has the temperament and the character to take his policy views and his political preferences and put them in a box marked irrelevant and set it aside every morning when he puts on the black robe.

Rather than asking a question that is impossible to ascertain(was Ford assaulted 36 years ago), let's play by Senator Sasse's rules. Does Kavanaugh have the temperament to overcome "his policy views and political preferences", and does he have the temperament. His initial response to being asked about the alleged sexual assault was:

I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.

Pretend he wasn't coached. On the surface, he's provided the seemingly immediate and assertive emotional response of a proud man being accused of a terrible crime. I'd consider this a natural reaction for any man(or woman). But we're asking him not to be any man(or woman)... we're asking him to be a Supreme Court Justice that can put that all of that(which I believe should include public opinion) aside. We're asking one of nine people not to look at their policy views or their political leanings, and make a legal decision. Is a man that's unwilling to hear out the other side of an argument appropriate to sit on the Supreme Court? Wouldn't an emotional response bring into question his Temperament? Just consider it.

Let's imagine the other side; he was coached ahead of time. Which would mean he saw this coming. No one's going to believe he was caught off-guard, or unprepared by legal coaches. Especially after Senator Grassley was near-immediately able to produce a list of sixty five female character witnesses from Kavanaugh's high school. In this scenario, his temperament would be fine, but his Character would be of question; it would appear that he was attempting to play ignorant(lies of admission) while he and his coaches knew better.

Move this a little down the timeline, and we can see him double down on not knowing anything about the accusation. Further, not even attempting to bridge knowledge gaps of the accusation in a second statement, merely leaving it up to the Senate Judiciary Committee

This is a completely false allegation. I have never done anything like what the accuser describes—to her or to anyone[...] Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making the accusation until she identified herself yesterday. I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the Committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity

Convenient that the Senate Judiciary Committee, controlled by the same group that nominated him. Very likely having a hand in his coaching. This, too, holds a different problem. Instead of having an active hand in understanding the allegation and locating the truth, one of nine people asked to understand the truth and interpret the law through is content passing the buck... again, to the same committee that shares political preferences with the man who nominated him in the first place.

A LIFETIME appointment to the Supreme Court of the United States of America. That's serious business. A similar situation(admittedly not identical) seems to be sitting on the jury of someone facing life in prison. Yeah, the stakes are higher... it's not just one person whose life is affected, but millions. Setting aside all other issues(perjury, blatant withholding of documents from the government, pretty obvious political leanings, pro-life, near presidential immunity, alleged sexual assault/attempted rape, the whole "no means yes" rhetoric employed by his fraternity, etc), are you sure?

Based on only the above, are you sure that beyond any reasonable doubt that this man is capable of, and willing to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America for the rest of his life?

 

[Red]

https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/[object Object]
This is whole article is a really great indictment of right wing politics, but this bit really stood out.

I keep getting a 404 error message at that link. Hopefully this one works...

https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/brett-kavanaugh-is-a-man-the-right-can-get-behind-1829225731

 

[The Thriller]

If there were photographic proof of Kavanaugh assaulting a woman it might be a different story. Clinton was accused of raping Broaddrick. He also was accused of visiting Epstein's Orgy Island by a 15 yr old prostitute on the island. No one seems to care about that. Trump is just as bad if not worse.

The problem is who we appoint as our leaders, and we have two corrupt parties that are to blame. And we let it happen. We get what we deserve.

Great! Even more reason to hold off confirming him until a thorough and complete investigation can be conducted. Right?

Why are repubs rushing this? They recently proved that we can go 400+ days without a 9th justice. Right? So why the rush to confirm him? Maybe photo evidence exists? We won’t know as long as we don’t investigate.

Also clinton? Really? It’s 2018. How much longer are we gonna beat that dead horse? Call me crazy, but I think things have changed since 1992. Why not focus on something from this century? You know, like a very popular democrat from Minnesota?

 

[The Thriller]

I believe you have me blocked, and that's ok. But you have asked a question that starts leading back the inquiry we should be considering here; Is this man capable of setting aside his personal feelings in favor of the constitution/law?

Let's frame what a Republican asked the very first day of hearings



Rather than asking a question that is impossible to ascertain(was Ford assaulted 36 years ago), let's play by Senator Sasse's rules. Does Kavanaugh have the temperament to overcome "his policy views and political preferences", and does he have the temperament. His initial response to being asked about the alleged sexual assault was:



Pretend he wasn't coached. On the surface, he's provided the seemingly immediate and assertive emotional response of a proud man being accused of a terrible crime. I'd consider this a natural reaction for any man(or woman). But we're asking him not to be any man(or woman)... we're asking him to be a Supreme Court Justice that can put that all of that(which I believe should include public opinion) aside. We're asking one of nine people not to look at their policy views or their political leanings, and make a legal decision. Is a man that's unwilling to hear out the other side of an argument appropriate to sit on the Supreme Court? Wouldn't an emotional response bring into question his Temperament? Just consider it.

Let's imagine the other side; he was coached ahead of time. Which would mean he saw this coming. No one's going to believe he was caught off-guard, or unprepared by legal coaches. Especially after Senator Grassley was near-immediately able to produce a list of sixty five female character witnesses from Kavanaugh's high school. In this scenario, his temperament would be fine, but his Character would be of question; it would appear that he was attempting to play ignorant(lies of admission) while he and his coaches knew better.

Move this a little down the timeline, and we can see him double down on not knowing anything about the accusation. Further, not even attempting to bridge knowledge gaps of the accusation in a second statement, merely leaving it up to the Senate Judiciary Committee



Convenient that the Senate Judiciary Committee, controlled by the same group that nominated him. Very likely having a hand in his coaching. This, too, holds a different problem. Instead of having an active hand in understanding the allegation and locating the truth, one of nine people asked to understand the truth and interpret the law through is content passing the buck... again, to the same committee that shares political preferences with the man who nominated him in the first place.

A LIFETIME appointment to the Supreme Court of the United States of America. That's serious business. A similar situation(admittedly not identical) seems to be sitting on the jury of someone facing life in prison. Yeah, the stakes are higher... it's not just one person whose life is affected, but millions. Setting aside all other issues(perjury, blatant withholding of documents from the government, pretty obvious political leanings, pro-life, near presidential immunity, alleged sexual assault/attempted rape, the whole "no means yes" rhetoric employed by his fraternity, etc), are you sure?

Based on only the above, are you sure that beyond any reasonable doubt that this man is capable of, and willing to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America for the rest of his life?

If K lacks the moral character to come clean about his alleged crimes what else is the guy hiding? I for one am still curious how all his debt was paid off. What about his conflicts of interest?

What else is he lying about?

why shouldn't morality count when we're talking about a justice? If his judgement sucks so bad why the hell are we considering him for the Supreme Court? Is it because he favors big corporations (who paid off his debt) and a president who wants him to shield him from investigation, and a Christian right salivating over the prospect of rolling back one of the key civil rights achievements of the past century?

These things matter.

 

[Gameface]

If there were photographic proof of Kavanaugh assaulting a woman it might be a different story. Clinton was accused of raping Broaddrick. He also was accused of visiting Epstein's Orgy Island by a 15 yr old prostitute on the island. No one seems to care about that. Trump is just as bad if not worse.

The problem is who we appoint as our leaders, and we have two corrupt parties that are to blame. And we let it happen. We get what we deserve.

We should totally impeach Bill Clinton... Ready, set, GO!

****! Turns out he hasn't been the president for almost two decades. Guess that's why "no one cares."

 

[♪alt13]

Lol. There is not one of these things that I could not do if I made a claim against someone else. We know very little about her claim, but one thing we do know is that she didn't give the therapist a name. I am not saying that her claim is false, but I am saying that making a false claim is definitely possible. And she does stand to gain. She's already a hero to many.

She's a psychologist. She is married with kids. She is in her fifties. She is not some left wing radical that lives in the forest and has nothing to lose.

You know the political machine has been digging for dirt to damage her credibility but so far silence.

Why?

Because she is a regular person. Probably better than most. How would you look if that machine turned its focus on you? Not squeaky clean I bet.

I don't think that you make it that far in life without some serious dirt if you are the type of person that would lie about getting raped.

She's credible. Worth taking 3 days to investigate at the very least.

 

[The Thriller]

Interesting. I think the gop has an harassment problem. It’s almost like a misogynistic and racist cult that resists diversity and attacks women led by the world’s most obnoxious narcissist is full of deplorable human beings. This is happening way too frequently to merely be a coincidence.

Grassley has proven to be a misogynist so it’s no small wonder that he’s surrounded by horrible humans too.

A communications adviser to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) during the Supreme Court confirmation fight has abruptly resigned after an accusation of sexual harassment — an allegation he denies.

“Garrett was one of several temporary staff brought on to assist in the committee’s consideration of the Supreme Court nomination, a team that has done outstanding work,” a committee spokesman said Saturday morning.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f93fb6-be73-11e8-be70-52bd11fe18af_story.html

 

[RJF]

Interesting. I think the gop has an harassment problem. It’s almost like a misogynistic and racist cult that resists diversity and attacks women led by the world’s most obnoxious narcissist is full of deplorable human beings. This is happening way too frequently to merely be a coincidence.

Grassley has proven to be a misogynist so it’s no small wonder that he’s surrounded by horrible humans too.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f93fb6-be73-11e8-be70-52bd11fe18af_story.html

Or the dirtiest tactic the left has to win a “fight”. Lumping all righties into this misogynistic bubble is why people are walking away from the left. The party screaming for tolerance and inclusion strikes me as the least tolerant and inclusive. But what do I know, me with my white privilege...

 

[The Thriller]

We should totally impeach Bill Clinton... Ready, set, GO!

****! Turns out he hasn't been the president for almost two decades. Guess that's why "no one cares."

Exactly.

And it’s not like the party and country has remained the same. Women have never been more empowered. #metoo has broken down barriers (clearly not all) and we’ve seen major celebrities with long dark histories taken down.

The DNC depends on women candidates and women voters. The top democrats in the running for president in 2020 are primarily women (Harris, Warren, Gillabrand). There’s no way bill Clinton could run today. There’s no way he’d win.

Al Franken was one of the most popular democrats in the senate. He was rumored to be in the running for president in 2020. What’s he doing now?

Today, it almost seems like the gop only nominated deplorable racists and misogynists. If dark histories full of harassment, racism, and abuse arise, it’s almost like an endorsement.

From beating the hell out of reporters (Gianforte), to racism (Too many to count), to sexual harassment (again, too many to count. But it’s led by trump).

The party that lacks diversity is clearly bearing the fruits of what happens when you don’t respect others. It’s a cult that merely serves to satisfy its short-term emotional/physical desire.

 

[The Thriller]

Or the dirtiest tactic the left has to win a “fight”. Lumping all righties into this misogynistic bubble is why people are walking away from the left. The party screaming for tolerance and inclusion strikes me as the least tolerant and inclusive. But what do I know, me with my white privilege...

First of all, facts matter. People aren’t walking away from the left. In fact, I saw a poll earlier today where Cruz is down 2 pts to O’Rouke. That’s tremendous and definitely puts the senate in play.

Tolerance and inclusion? We weren’t the ones with tiki torches and chanting Nazi slogans “blood and soil”. We weren’t the ones labeling all Mexicans murderers and racists. We weren’t the ones putting kids in cages. Where was your outrage then??? Or is it ok to be a deplorable human being as long as you “win?”

And white privilege exists. Your inference leads me to believe you’re looking to argue and already closed to facts. But we’ll see!

Secondly, the GOP clearly has problems with diversity and women. This was stated in the 2012 autopsy ordered by Reince Piebrus.

Thirdly, in response to the GOP’s autopsy, rather than soften on immigration, become more moderate, and embrace women and minorities, they doubled down and elected Donald trump.

It’s no surprise to me why they’re weekly having issues with race (DeSantis, we don’t want to “monkey this up”) to sexual harassment (look at how republicans have smeared, intimidated, and attacked Dr Ford just this past week).

You can’t have a cult fed hate propaganda like this and not take a toll.



Who believes in this? And why would they remain in this cult if this isn’t what they believe?

 

[The Thriller]

Inconvenient facts...

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

He's a judge. He is married with kids. He is in his fifties. He is not some right wing radical that pounds on a bible and has nothing to lose.

You know the political machine has been digging for dirt to damage his credibility but so far nothing but their usual crazed chaos.

Why?

Because he's is a regular person. Probably better than most. How would you look if that machine turned its focus on you? Not squeaky clean I bet.

I don't think that you make it that far in life without some serious dirt if you are the type of person that would lie about trying to rape people.

She's credible. Worth taking 3 days to investigate at the very least.

Fixed.

 

[JAZZGASM]

We should totally impeach Bill Clinton... Ready, set, GO!

****! Turns out he hasn't been the president for almost two decades. Guess that's why "no one cares."

Lots of evidence of Hillary demeaning and trying to destroy her husbands accusers, including greenlighting the investigator hires to ruin Flowers reputation. Hillary being complicit is awful, and we almost put Bill back in the WH last yr. Think his behavior towards women has changed? There is evidence of Bill being on orgy island, where underage girls were raped.

We should care that we allow our representatives to pull this ****. It happens on both sides and people try to justify why their parties actions are acceptable, when none of them are.

When I see the smug reactions from many posters, bring complicit with their parties actions and attacking the others for doing the same type of actions, it makes it clear to me that we have the politicians we deserve.

 

[Gameface]

Broaddarick



Lots of evidence of Hillary demeaning and trying to destroy her husbands accusers, including greenlighting the investigator hires to ruin Flowers reputation. Hillary being complicit is awful, and we almost put Bill back in the WH last yr. Think his behavior towards women has changed? There is evidence of Bill being on orgy island, where underage girls were raped.

We should care that we allow our representatives to pull this ****. It happens on both sides and people try to justify why their parties actions are acceptable, when none of them are.

When I see the smug reactions from many posters, bring complicit with their parties actions and attacking the others for doing the same type of actions, it makes it clear to me that we have the politicians we deserve.

My party?

I'm not a politician. I don't have a party.

I'll say for the 100th ****ing time on jazzfanz, I have voted for more Republican Presidential candidates than I have Democrat.

I'm certainly rooting for the Democrats at the moment because I want Trump to be held to the standards of conduct that every other President has been held to. He is normalizing behavior that is 100% unacceptable to me.

I supported Bill Clinton being impeached because he looked directly at the American people and lied, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." That, in and of itself, made me feel strongly that he was not worthy of being my President.

Hillary Clinton is NOT the President. You're going to need to find a new boogeyman. You have slain that one, congratulations. You can't beat her anymore, she's already dead. She will never hold another elected position or be appointed to a high level position. She's done. Time to move the **** on.

The question isn't how you want previous officials to act. The question is, how do you want our current officials to act?

 

[Harambe]

If K lacks the moral character to come clean about his alleged crimes what else is the guy hiding? I for one am still curious how all his debt was paid off. What about his conflicts of interest?

What else is he lying about?

why shouldn't morality count when we're talking about a justice? If his judgement sucks so bad why the hell are we considering him for the Supreme Court? Is it because he favors big corporations (who paid off his debt) and a president who wants him to shield him from investigation, and a Christian right salivating over the prospect of rolling back one of the key civil rights achievements of the past century?

These things matter.

Morality does count. Don't think I'm advocating to outright ignore everything else I mentioned last night, and his debts that added up so quickly(thank you for reminding me), and one that I forgot(native rights prejudice/neglect brought up by Senator Hirono). What I was saying, was that the way this allegation was handled by he and his legal coaching staff alone is enough to exclude him on both Temperament and Character.

Please don't fool yourself into thinking we should constantly be asking 'what else is s/he lying about?'. It's simply unrealistic to think we're going to find nine saint level figures, having fair representation from all religious groups(including non-religious), with spotless records beyond reproach, that also happen to have law degrees and extensive experience interpreting the constitution.

 

[JAZZGASM]

My party?

I'm not a politician. I don't have a party.

I'll say for the 100th ****ing time on jazzfanz, I have voted for more Republican Presidential candidates than I have Democrat.

I'm certainly rooting for the Democrats at the moment because I want Trump to be held to the standards of conduct that every other President has been held to. He is normalizing behavior that is 100% unacceptable to me.

I supported Bill Clinton being impeached because he looked directly at the American people and lied, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." That, in and of itself, made me feel strongly that he was not worthy of being my President.

Hillary Clinton is NOT the President. You're going to need to find a new boogeyman. You have slain that one, congratulations. You can't beat her anymore, she's already dead. She will never hold another elected position or be appointed to a high level position. She's done. Time to move the **** on.

The question isn't how you want previous officials to act. The question is, how do you want our current officials to act?

The question is how we keep letting these types of people get elected. Hillary or Trump. Some choice.

And yes, Clinton was impeached by the House, but not one democrat in the senate voted for conviction, even though he clearly lied under oath. Goes to show how our two main parties simply vote the party line, not what is best for the country, or what the evidence dictates. Same **** continues today. And instead of fixing these issues, both parties just point the finger at each other instead of looking in the mirror.

IMO, as long as we have a two party system that essentially selects candidate options for us, it will continue to be this way.

 

[fishonjazz]

and we almost put Bill back in the WH last yr.

?

 

[JAZZGASM]

?

If Hillary won, they both would be back in the White House...

 

[Scat]

Interesting article on memory

https://apnews.com/4bbe9c74f889442f...ailty-may-be-playing-role-in-Kavanaugh-matter

 

[Scat]

Why memories are unreliable